- nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

MUST READ: Danah Boyd, "What World Are We Building?"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 1, 2016

Feb. 1, 2016

*"****What World Are We Building?" * danah boyd 2015 Everett C Parker Lecture <http://uccmediajustice.org/content_item/parkerlecture2015>: October 20, 2015 /This talk was written for the 2015 Everett C Parker Lecture <http://uccmediajustice.org/content_item/parkerlecture2015>, in honor of his amazing work. Being able to give this lecture is an honor, but it is also deeply humbling in light of his amazing work. / Citation: boyd, danah. 2015. "What World Are We Building?" /Everett C Parker Lecture./ Washington, DC, October 20. *INTRODUCTION* I am both honored and humbled to be with you today. Today is a day of celebration and mourning, a reminder that life and death are deeply connected and that what we do with our time on this earth matters. We are here today because Dr. Parker spent much of his life fighting for the rights of others - notably the poor and people of color, recognizing that the ability to get access to new technologies to communicate and learn weren’t simply privileges, but rights. He challenged people to ask hard questions and ignore the seemingly insurmountable nature of complex problems. In the process, he paved a road that enables a whole new generation of activists to rally for media rights. I’m here today to talk with you about battles underway around new internet-based technologies. I’m an ethnographer, which means that I’ve spent the bulk of my professional life trying to map cultural practices at the intersection between technology and society. It’s easy to love or hate technology, to blame it for social ills or to imagine that it will fix what people cannot. But technology is made by people. In a society. And it has a tendency to mirror and magnify the issues that affect everyday life. The good, bad, and ugly. ….. continua qui: http://www.danah.org/papers/talks/2015/ParkerLecture.html

1 0

Fwd: New Cybersecurity Report Reframes the Encryption Debate
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 1, 2016

Feb. 1, 2016

-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: New Cybersecurity Report Reframes the Encryption Debate Resent-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 14:08:35 +0100 Resent-From: d004620(a)polito.it Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2016 13:08:33 +0000 From: The Berkman Center <Cyber(a)law.harvard.edu> Reply-To: The Berkman Center <Cyber(a)law.harvard.edu> To: demartin(a)polito.it New Cybersecurity Report Reframes the Encryption Debate New cybersecurity report takes issue with the usual framing of the encryption debate and offers context and insights that widen the scope of the conversation. View this email in your browser <http://us10.campaign-archive2.com/?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd&id=79f9ccdb7…> <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…> *Don’t Panic: Making Progress on the “Going Dark” Debate* /New Report from Harvard Berkman Center's Cybersecurity Project Reframes the Encryption Debate/ *February 1, 2016 (Cambridge, MA) –* The Berklett Cybersecurity project of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University is pleased to announce the publication of a new report entitled “Don’t Panic: Making Progress on the ‘Going Dark’ Debate. <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…>” The report examines the high-profile debate around government access to encryption, and offers a new perspective gleaned from the discussion, debate, and analyses of an exceptional and diverse group of security and policy experts from academia, civil society, the private sector, and the U.S. intelligence community. “Many conversations on sensitive subjects of technology and security are productive because they’re among people who already agree,” said Prof. Jonathan Zittrain, faculty chair of the Berkman Center. “The aim of this project is to bring together people who come from very different starting points and roles, and who very rarely have a chance to speak frankly with one another. We want to come away with some common insights that could help push the discussion into some new territory.” The report takes issue with the usual framing of the encryption debate and offers context and insights that widen the scope of the conversation to more accurately reflect the surveillance landscape both now and in the future. “In this report, we’re questioning whether the ‘going dark’ metaphor used by the FBI and other government officials fully describes the future of the government’s capacity to access communications,” said Berkman Center fellow Bruce Schneier. “We think it doesn’t. While it may be true that there are pockets of dimness, there other areas where communications and information are actually becoming more illuminated, opening up more vectors for surveillance.” “There’s no question that the use of encryption impedes government surveillance of terrorists and criminals,” said Matthew Olsen, former Director of the National Counterterrorism Center. “And we take seriously the concerns of the FBI and others about encryption. We looked forward to consider the overall trajectory of technology and surveillance, and identified points of consensus about the government’s ability to collect information necessary to protect the public.” Set within the recent implementation of encryption by various companies and the recent history of the government’s increasing concerns, the report outlines how market forces and commercial interests as well as the increasing prevalence of networked sensors in machines and everyday appliances point to a future with more opportunities for surveillance, not less. The group and report’s signatories include high-profile individuals who bring a spectrum of perspectives to the table. “The sign-on from this set of participants is unique. These are people who were likely to disagree about many things in the debate, and yet we found common ground,” said Senior Researcher David O’Brien. See the report page on the Berkman Center website <http://harvard.us10.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115c…> for a brief summary of the findings and to download the report. *About the Berklett Cybersecurity Project* The Berkman Center for Internet & Society’s Berklett Cybersecurity project convenes a diverse group of security and policy experts from academia, civil society, and the U.S. intelligence community to explore and evaluate the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. government in promoting cybersecurity. This group is examining a wide range of topics including, among others, the ongoing encryption debate, public-private information sharing, and responsible disclosures of software vulnerabilities. The project is led by Professor Jonathan Zittrain, former National Counterterrorism Center Director Matthew Olsen, and cryptographer and civil liberties author Bruce Schneier. The name “Berklett” is a portmanteau of “Berkman” and “Hewlett,” as in the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, which generously supports the effort. More information at https://brk.mn/cybersecurity <http://harvard.us10.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115c…>. Media Contact: David O’Brien, Senior Researcher, dobrien(a)cyber.law.harvard.edu _About the Berkman Center for Internet & Society_ Founded in 1997, the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University is dedicated to exploring, understanding, and shaping the development of the digitally-networked environment. A diverse, interdisciplinary community of scholars, practitioners, technologists, policy experts, and advocates, we seek to tackle the most important challenges of the digital age while keeping a focus on tangible real-world impact in the public interest. Our faculty, fellows, staff and affiliates conduct research, build tools and platforms, educate others, form bridges and facilitate dialogue across and among diverse communities. More information at www.cyber.law.harvard.edu <http://harvard.us10.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115c…>. You are receiving this email because you signed up to receive announcements from the Berkman Center. For regular updates about our events, our community, and what we're writing and speaking about, sign up for our weekly newsletter, the Berkman Buzz <http://harvard.us10.list-manage1.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115c…>. You can stay in touch with us in other ways, too: join us for an upcoming event <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…>, subscribe to the Radio Berkman podcast <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…>, and follow us on Twitter <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…> and Facebook. <http://harvard.us10.list-manage.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115cd…> The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University was founded to explore cyberspace, share in its study, and help pioneer its development. *For more information, visit:* http://cyber.law.harvard.edu <http://harvard.us10.list-manage2.com/track/click?u=ef13e6d75b74b1791f13115c…>

1 0

NYT (Berkman): "New Technologies Give Government Ample Means to Track Suspects, Study Finds"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 1, 2016

Feb. 1, 2016

*New Technologies Give Government Ample Means to Track Suspects, Study Finds* By DAVID E. SANGERJAN. 31, 2016 WASHINGTON — For more than two years the F.B.I. and intelligence agencies have warned that encrypted communications are creating a “going dark” crisis that will keep them from tracking terrorists and kidnappers. Now, a study in which current and former intelligence officials participated concludes that the warning is wildly overblown, and that a raft of new technologies — like television sets with microphones and web-connected cars — are creating ample opportunities for the government to track suspects, many of them worrying. “ ‘Going dark’ does not aptly describe the long-term landscape for government surveillance,” concludes the study, to be published Monday by the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard. The study argues that the phrase ignores the flood of new technologies “being packed with sensors and wireless connectivity” that are expected to become the subject of court orders and subpoenas, and are already the target of the National Security Agency as it places “implants” into networks around the world to monitor communications abroad. […] Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/01/us/politics/new-technologies-give-governm…

1 0

NYT: "How Europe Protects, Your Online Data, Differently Than the U.S."
by J.C. DE MARTIN Feb. 1, 2016

Feb. 1, 2016

*How Europe Protects** **Your Online Data** **Differently Than the U.S.* By MARK SCOTT and NATASHA SINGER JAN. 31, 2016 Your digital footprint can quickly extend far and wide and be used in multiple ways. Your interactions on Facebook shape the ads you see there. The kinds of films and music you stream may allow online companies to make inferences about your political leanings or religious beliefs. And your health insurer may analyze details about your online shopping habits. How much control do you have over how companies collect and use your information? And what mechanisms are in place to protect your data against misuse? If you are in the United States or Europe, the answers vary, which has led to tensions between officials and disputes with companies. In the United States, a variety of laws apply to specific sectors, like health and credit. In the European Union, data protection is considered a fundamental right, which can have far-reaching consequences in all 28 member states. All the talk about data privacy can get caught up in political wrangling. But the different approaches have practical consequences for people, too. […] Continua qui: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/29/technology/data-privacy-polic…

1 0

Post-Doctoral Fellow and PhD Students at CMU.
by Alessandro Mantelero Feb. 1, 2016

Feb. 1, 2016

Nel caso qualcuno fosse interessato. AM > > The Heinz College at Carnegie Mellon University has one opening for a Post-Doctoral fellow and one or more openings for PhD students in projects focused on the economics or/and the behavioral economics of privacy. > > Prospective candidates are expected to have done graduate work in (Post-Doctoral position), or be interested in studying (PhD positions), one or more of the following areas: > > * Economics > > * Behavioral Economics or Behavioral Decision Research > > * Experimental Economics or Experimental Psychology > > * Privacy > > * Human Computer Interaction > > Successful candidates will work in areas related to the economics or/and the behavioral economics of privacy, and collaborate with Professor Alessandro Acquisti. They may also interact with other members of CMU CBDR (Center for Behavioral and Decision Research) lab and of CMU PeeX (Privacy Economics Experiments) Lab, as well as with other CMU students and professors, in an interdisciplinary environment that includes social scientists and technologists. Successful candidates will be expected to conduct original research and publish their results in top-ranked journals and conferences. > > Post-Doctoral opening: There is no deadline for applying to the Post-Doc opening, but applications will be considered on a rolling basis starting February 1, 2016, with an expected (but negotiable) starting date of Summer 2016 or Fall 2016. The Post-Doctoral position comes with very competitive salary and benefits. The initial appointment is for one year, with an option of renewal for another one or two years. Interested candidates should forward their resumes, along with the names of three references, to Alessandro Acquisti by email at acquisti(a)andrew.cmu.edu. > > PhD openings: Interested candidates are encouraged to apply via http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/school-of-information-systems-and-management/docto… as soon as possible, and no later than February 29, 2016. They are also encouraged to forward their resumes to Alessandro Acquisti by email at acquisti(a)andrew.cmu.edu. Accepted PhD applicants will receive a grant covering stipend and tuition for at least the first two years of their PhD program. > > Related links: > > “The Economics of Privacy,” Acquisti, Taylor, and Wagman. Journal of Economic Literature, forthcoming, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2580411 > > “Privacy and Human Behavior in the Age of Information,” Acquisti, Brandimarte, and Loewenstein. Science, 2015, http://science.sciencemag.org/content/347/6221/509 > > Acquisti’s site: http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/~acquisti/ > > Copy of this document: http://www.heinz.cmu.edu/~acquisti/economics-privacy-postdoc-cmu-2016.htm > -- Prof. Avv. Alessandro Mantelero Politecnico di Torino Nexa Center for Internet and Society | Director of Privacy Politecnico di Torino–Tongji University| Coordinator, Double Degree program in Management and IP Law Nanjing University of Information Science and Technology | Part-time Expert, School of Public Administration European Data Protection Law Review | Associate Editor http://staff.polito.it/alessandro.mantelero EMAIL POLICY: twice a day (Mon-Fri)

1 0

Towards a critical data science – the complicated relationship between data and the democratic project
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 31, 2016

Jan. 31, 2016

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2016/01/13/towards-a-critical-data-scienc… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

1 0

Annual Privacy Forum 2016 (7-8 September, Frankfurt)
by Fernanda Faini Jan. 30, 2016

Jan. 30, 2016

Salve, segnalo Conferenza e relativa Call for Papers. Annual Privacy Forum 2016 (http://privacyforum.eu/) - bringing research & policy together,7-8 September, Frankfurt Nowadays electronic communication networks and digital services are an essential part of an increasing number of everyday commodities. In the era of automated profiling and electronic surveillance, citizens face a serious threat against their right to privacy and informational self-determination, especially when using the internet and mobile services. The lack of transparency regarding the functionality and interconnection of such services increases the risk of uncontrollable processing of personal data. In this regard, the upcoming Data Protection Regulation will be a useful instrument to protect the privacy of individuals. However, for its successful implementation, this new framework needs to be enforced by proper technologies and encompassed with sustainable business models along with mechanisms to promote privacy awareness and help users to understand the value of their data. ENISA is organizing the 2016 edition of the annual privacy forum, in the light of the upcoming data protection regulation and the European digital agenda. We invite papers covering original work on the technological, economic, legal and societal aspects of the challenges that will come up with the implementation of the new framework. We particularly invite multidisciplinary papers that make it explicit how the presented work can contribute to bridging the gap between research and policy. Moreover, in order to also encourage contributions from policy makers, representatives of competent authorities (such as Data Protection Authorities), industry experts, NGOs and civil society associations, we invite opinion papers from all stakeholders on the above mentioned topics. Opinion papers will reflect the opinion/position of the author(s) on the selected privacy-related topic. ◾Implementation aspects of ‘by design’ and 'by default' paradigms ◾Implementation and adoption of PETs in today’s digital services ◾Modelling of data protection and privacy requirements, such as: machine readable representations and automatic evaluation of policies ◾Enabling transparency: technological and organizational challenges. ◾Technical solutions for the enforcement and the implications of the subject’s right, e.g. right to erasure, access and correction. ◾Aspects of privacy impact and risk assessment ◾Technical solutions for data portability ◾Sustainable business models for privacy friendly online services ◾Information and consent in online environments: practical solutions and implementations ◾Privacy awareness, reliability and usability of PETs ◾Trust services for the protection of personal data - privacy aware trust services (i.e. electronic certificates, signatures, etc.) ◾Security measures for the protection of personal data ◾Economics of privacy and personal data Review and Publication All submissions will be thoroughly reviewed by our PC members. We aim at minimal 3 average 4 reviews per Paper. Furthermore, papers will be published in the proceedings of the conference with a publishing house soon to be selected and announced. Important dates Submission of full papers: March 15, 2016 23:59 AoE Notification to author: May 10, 201 Camera-ready copies: May 31, 2016 APF 2016 taking place on: September 7-8, 2016 Cari saluti Fernanda --- Fernanda Faini cell: 3385352449 mail: fernandafaini(a)gmail.com twitter: @fernandafaini facebook: https://www.facebook.com/fernanda.faini linkedIn: *https://www.linkedin.com/in/fernandafaini <https://www.linkedin.com/in/fernandafaini>* skype: fernanda_pensiero sito web: *http://www.fernandafaini.it <http://www.fernandafaini.it>*

1 0

Google’s Go Victory Is Just a Glimpse of How Powerful AI Will Be
by gianluca quaglia Jan. 30, 2016

Jan. 30, 2016

Google’s Go Victory Is Just a Glimpse of How Powerful AI Will Be An artificially intelligent Google machine just beat a human grandmaster at the game of Go, the 2,500-year-old contest of strategy and intellect that’s exponentially more complex than the game of chess. And Nick Bostrom isn’t exactly impressed. Bostrom is the Swedish-born Oxford philosophy professor who rose to prominence on the back of his recent bestseller Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, a book that explores the benefits of AI, but also argues that a truly intelligent computer could hasten the extinction of humanity. It’s not that he discounts the power of Google’s Go-playing machine. He just argues that it isn’t necessarily a huge leap forward. The technologies behind Google’s system, Bostrom points out, have been steadily improving for years, including much-discussed AI techniques such as deep learning and reinforcement learning. Google beating a Go grandmaster is just part of a much bigger arc. It started long ago, and it will continue for years to come. continua qui http://www.wired.com/2016/01/googles-go-victory-is-just-a-glimpse-of-how-po…

1 0

Cooperazione 2.0 Le alternative nella sharing economy - cheFare
by J.C. DE MARTIN Jan. 29, 2016

Jan. 29, 2016

https://www.che-fare.com/cooperazione-2-0-le-alternative-nella-sharing-econ… (Sent from my wireless device; please excuse brevity and typos (if any))

2 1

Prof. Floridi (Garante Centro Nexa) è membro dell'Ethics Advisory Group (EDPS)
by Giuseppe Futia Jan. 29, 2016

Jan. 29, 2016

Gentilissimi, siamo lieti di informarvi che il Prof. Luciano Floridi, Direttore della Ricerca dell'Oxford Internet Institute e Garante del Centro Nexa su Internet & Società, è uno dei sei membri dell'Ethics Advisory Group creato dallo European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS). Maggiori informazioni sono disponibili all'indirizzo: https://secure.edps.europa.eu/EDPSWEB/webdav/site/mySite/shared/Documents/E… Cordialmente, -- ------------------------------------------------- Giuseppe Futia Communication Manager Nexa Center for Internet & Society Politecnico di Torino - DAUIN Corso Duca degli Abruzzi, 24 - 10129 Torino web: http://nexa.polito.it mail: giuseppe.futia(a)polito.it tel. +39 011 090 7219

1 0